Go Back   Wireless and Wifi Forums > Cellular Communications > US Networks > alt.cellular.verizon
Register FAQ Forum Rules Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Advertise Mark Forums Read

 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 02:08 AM
Agunat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment listsin Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN. Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature that probably would not be listed on the phone's spec sheet so we'll probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, or Pantech Hotshot are the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
Thanks in advance... Bob

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 03:59 PM
sms88
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/24/2012 7:08 PM, Agunat wrote:
> My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment lists in Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN. Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature that probably would not be listed on the phone's spec sheet so we'll probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, or Pantech Hotshot are the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
> Thanks in advance... Bob


Long answer.

On Motorola non-smart phones you can export contacts and calendar to and
from the computer from Outlook using Motorola Phone tools. Alas, it does
not work with Outlook 2010, so you'd have to downgrade your wife's
version of Outlook to do this, as well as finding an appropriate phone
still sold by Verizon, or a used phone, i.e. V325i or a Razr. It would
also be a pain in the butt to do this very often!

<http://www.motorola.com/staticfiles/Support/US-EN/Software/Motorola-Phone-Tools/US-EN/_Documents/_Static-Files/MotorolaPhoneToolsV5_Final%20User%20Guide.pdf>

The key question here, is "are you under contract with Verizon?" The
reason is that if you don't want a data plan, but want a smart phone,
and want to remain on Verizon's network, is to port your wife's Verizon
phone number to Verizon's MVNO Pageplus. You can use any Verizon phone*,
even a smart phone, without any requirement for a data plan.

*You can't use a Verizon prepaid phone, Blackberry, and they say no
iPhones but iPhones actually do work for now).

The down side with Pageplus is that you don't get a highly subsidized
smart phone. You'd have to purchase a new or gently used Verizon smart
phone, but with the monthly savings you would quickly recoup that
initial cost. My family currently has four Android smart phones on
Pageplus. Since Verizon is the only carrier that works well in our area
we had to stay on Verizon's network, and this was the way to have smart
phones with no data plan (Pageplus does offer some data plans with
relatively small amounts of data, for a good price as well, i.e. for
$29.95 you get 1200 minutes, 3000 texts, and 100MB of data per month;
for $12 you get 250 minutes, 250 texts, and 10MB of data per month).

The cleanest solution for syncing with Outlook is to use a Windows
Mobile smart phone and use Windows Mobile Device Center to sync. Just be
aware that there are some strange things with Outlook 2010 and Windows
Mobile Device Center. If you have the 64 bit version of Outlook 2010 (as
opposed to the 32 bit version of Outlook running on a 32 bit or 64 bit
version of Windows) it won't work. Again, to do this without a data
plan, you'd have to port the Verizon phone number over to Verizon MVNO
Pageplus.

If your wife isn't wedded to Outlook, she could use Google Calendar and
Google Contacts, and sync to an Android phone (you can export an Outlook
contact list to Google Contacts, but it's not something you'd want to do
on a continuous basis). Again, to do this without a data plan, you'd
have to port the Verizon phone number over to Verizon MVNO Pageplus.

If she is wedded to Outlook, but you want to use an Android phone, you
can buy an app that syncs Outlook directly to an Android phone via USB,
i.e. <http://www.companionlink.com/android/outlook/>. Again, to do this
without a data plan, you'd have to port the Verizon phone number over to
Verizon MVNO Pageplus.

Since Pageplus does offer data, it's best to turn mobile data off on the
smart phone except when you explicitly want to use it, since many
applications are stealth data users.

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 04:53 PM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

At 25 Apr 2012 08:59:09 -0700 sms88 wrote:
> On 4/24/2012 7:08 PM, Agunat wrote:
> > My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment
> > lists in Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN.
> > Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as
> > "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which
> > phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature
> > that probably would not be listed on the phone's spec sheet so we'll
> > probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as
> > though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, or Pantech Hotshot are
> > the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
> > Thanks in advance... Bob

>
> Long answer.
>
> On Motorola non-smart phones you can export contacts and calendar to
> and from the computer from Outlook using Motorola Phone tools. Alas, it
> does not work with Outlook 2010, so you'd have to downgrade your wife's
> version of Outlook to do this, as well as finding an appropriate phone
> still sold by Verizon, or a used phone, i.e. V325i or a Razr. It would
> also be a pain in the butt to do this very often!
>
> <http://www.motorola.com/staticfiles/...ware/Motorola-

Phone-Tools/US-EN/_Documents/_Static-Files/MotorolaPhoneToolsV5_Final%
20User%20Guide.pdf>
>
> The key question here, is "are you under contract with Verizon?" The
> reason is that if you don't want a data plan, but want a smart phone,
> and want to remain on Verizon's network, is to port your wife's Verizon
> phone number to Verizon's MVNO Pageplus. You can use any Verizon
> phone*, even a smart phone, without any requirement for a data plan.
>
> *You can't use a Verizon prepaid phone, Blackberry, and they say no
> iPhones but iPhones actually do work for now).
>
> The down side with Pageplus is that you don't get a highly subsidized
> smart phone. You'd have to purchase a new or gently used Verizon smart
> phone, but with the monthly savings you would quickly recoup that
> initial cost. My family currently has four Android smart phones on
> Pageplus. Since Verizon is the only carrier that works well in our area
> we had to stay on Verizon's network, and this was the way to have smart
> phones with no data plan (Pageplus does offer some data plans with
> relatively small amounts of data, for a good price as well, i.e. for
> $29.95 you get 1200 minutes, 3000 texts, and 100MB of data per month;
> for $12 you get 250 minutes, 250 texts, and 10MB of data per month).
>
> The cleanest solution for syncing with Outlook is to use a Windows
> Mobile smart phone and use Windows Mobile Device Center to sync. Just
> be aware that there are some strange things with Outlook 2010 and
> Windows Mobile Device Center. If you have the 64 bit version of Outlook
> 2010 (as opposed to the 32 bit version of Outlook running on a 32 bit
> or 64 bit version of Windows) it won't work. Again, to do this without
> a data plan, you'd have to port the Verizon phone number over to
> Verizon MVNO Pageplus.


While I'm a huge fan of Windows-based phones, virtually any smartphone
can sync with Outlook via the cloud. You need to download the "Microsoft
Hotmail Outlook Connector" plug-in for Outlook, and use it set up a new
or existing Microsoft Live/Hotmail address. You don't have to actually
use the actress for email, but you do need to make it the default
datastore for contacts and calendar, and cut and paste the contacts and
calendar from the previous default folders.

Next, you add that address as a "Microsoft Exchange" or an "Exchange
Activesync" (the wording will depend on the phone) email account on the
smartphone, and set it to sync manually (so it doesn't try to use
cellular data periodically.) You can sync it occasionally over WiFi
whenever necessary or convenient. Any changes to your contacts or
calendar made on either the PC or phone get uploaded to Microsoft's Live
server at the next sync, and downloaded to the other next time it syncs.
I keep three PCs and at least a half dozen smartphones synced this way,
without ever having to make a physical connection between them.


I write a FAQ about this from a friend's Windows Phone site, but the
Outlook sync instructions are applicable to any smartphone (or just for
people looking for a free and easy way to keep multiple Outlook PCs in
sync.)

<http://windowsphoneconcierge.com/ind...-a-live-its-a-
live-how-to-sync-outlook-2010-with-windows-phone-7/>

> If your wife isn't wedded to Outlook, she could use Google Calendar and
> Google Contacts, and sync to an Android phone (you can export an
> Outlook contact list to Google Contacts, but it's not something you'd
> want to do on a continuous basis). Again, to do this without a data plan,


> you'd have to port the Verizon phone number over to Verizon MVNO
> Pageplus.


Using Live/Hotmail as an intermediary will work just as well on an
Android phone as any other (but, IIRC, it has to be using Android 2.1 or
higher to support Exchange email without a third-party app. Most Android
phones not powered by coal-fired steam engines meet that criteria.)

> If she is wedded to Outlook, but you want to use an Android phone, you
> can buy an app that syncs Outlook directly to an Android phone via USB,
> i.e. <http://www.companionlink.com/android/outlook/>. Again, to do this
> without a data plan, you'd have to port the Verizon phone number over
> to Verizon MVNO Pageplus.


That's an expensive program, so I'd only recommend it to the cloud-
phobic. It's cheaper and easier to cloud sync via Live (or Google/Gmail,
for the most fervent anti-Microsofties- there are third-party Outlook
plugins to sync Outlook contacts with Gmail but I don't recommend them
over Live/Hotmail. The good ones are expensive, and the free ones I've
tried are buggy and unreliable.)

> Since Pageplus does offer data, it's best to turn mobile data off on
> the smart phone except when you explicitly want to use it, since many
> applications are stealth data users.


Good advice. Most smartphones are heavy "stealth data" users, since they
tend to sync contacts, calendars, email, and more periodically by
default.

Plenty of good new or used recent vintage phones are out there. The
failed Palm WebOS-based phones, like the Pixi, are excellent values at
about $50 brand-new-in-a-box.


Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 06:41 PM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/25/2012 9:53 AM, Todd Allcock wrote:

<snip>

> You don't have to actually
> use the actress for email, but you do need to make it the default
> datastore for contacts and calendar, and cut and paste the contacts and
> calendar from the previous default folders.


I don't understand how an actress is used as a datastore. Is that even
legal? Can you choose any actress you desire? Some tough decisions to be
made here.

> Plenty of good new or used recent vintage phones are out there. The
> failed Palm WebOS-based phones, like the Pixi, are excellent values at
> about $50 brand-new-in-a-box.


I went over to the Palm store in Mountain View when they were closing
these out. The line was very long and extremely slow. I gave up when
they said that they could no longer take credit cards.

The key question here is whether or not the op is out of contract and is
willing to port his wife to the Verizon MVNO in order to be able to have
a smart phone with no data plan on Verizon's network. As we have seen
here, some people stick with Verizon-proper for other reasons.
Personally, I moved to PP specifically because I wanted smart phones
with no data plans.


Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 08:28 PM
Agunat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:08:28 PM UTC-4, Agunat wrote:
> My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment lists in Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN. Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature that probably would not be listedon the phone's spec sheet so we'll probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, orPantech Hotshot are the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
> Thanks in advance... Bob


I'll tackle the rest later but in answer to the contract part is... there is no contract involved yet. This will be a new activation but I already have a Verizon family plan so the extra line would only be $10 a month if I don't get involved with data plans.

Bob

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 08:59 PM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/25/2012 1:28 PM, Agunat wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:08:28 PM UTC-4, Agunat wrote:
>> My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment lists in Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN. Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature that probably would not be listed on the phone's spec sheet so we'll probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, or Pantech Hotshot are the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
>> Thanks in advance... Bob

>
> I'll tackle the rest later but in answer to the contract part is... there is no contract involved yet. This will be a new activation but I already have a Verizon family plan so the extra line would only be $10 a month if I don't get involved with data plans.
>
> Bob


You still might look at a smart phone for your wife on Pageplus,
depending on how many minutes per month she uses. It could be that you
could lower the number of minutes on your Verizon family plan which
would offset the cost of Pageplus. But one downside: no free
mobile-to-mobile. Even though Pageplus uses Verizon's network, you don't
get free mobile-to-mobile to other Verizon subscribers (or other
Pageplus subscribers). No free nights and weekends either.

We still find it a good deal to have everyone on Pageplus rather than a
Verizon family plan, and even though we would get a 22% corporate
discount on Verizon. My wife and kids have never used any data on their
smartphones, and I don't think they even know how to enable mobile data,
though the kids use Wi-Fi all the time.

Pageplus has five plans:

1. Pay as you go (4-10/min, 5/text, 99/MB data)
($10, $25, & $50 refills last 120 days. $80 refill lasts 365 days),
Balance rolls over. 50/month service charge.

2. The 12: (250 min, 250 texts, 10MB data): $12/month.

3. Talk N Text 1200 (1200 min, 3000 texts, 100MB data): $30/month.

4. Unlimited Talk & Text (100MB of data): $40/month.

5. The 55: Unlimited Talk3 & Text (1GB of data): $55/month.

Personally, I think it would real PITA to manage appointments on a dumb
phone, but it can be done.



Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2012, 09:46 PM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

At 25 Apr 2012 11:41:00 -0700 SMS wrote:
> On 4/25/2012 9:53 AM, Todd Allcock wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > You don't have to actually
> > use the actress for email, but you do need to make it the default
> > datastore for contacts and calendar, and cut and paste the contacts

and
> > calendar from the previous default folders.

>
> I don't understand how an actress is used as a datastore. Is that even
> legal? Can you choose any actress you desire? Some tough decisions to
> be made here.



"Damn You Autocorrect!"

For those playing at home, the intended word was "account"...


> > Plenty of good new or used recent vintage phones are out there. The
> > failed Palm WebOS-based phones, like the Pixi, are excellent values at
> > about $50 brand-new-in-a-box.

>
> I went over to the Palm store in Mountain View when they were closing
> these out. The line was very long and extremely slow. I gave up when
> they said that they could no longer take credit cards.


Palm/HP dumped remaining Pixi stock on liquidators. They turn up all over
the place NIB for $35 (wholesale), $50 retail.

> The key question here is whether or not the op is out of contract and
> is willing to port his wife to the Verizon MVNO in order to be able to
> have a smart phone with no data plan on Verizon's network. As we have
> seen here, some people stick with Verizon-proper for other reasons.
> Personally, I moved to PP specifically because I wanted smart phones
> with no data plans.



Agreed.



Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2012, 01:47 AM
Agunat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:08:28 PM UTC-4, Agunat wrote:
> My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment lists in Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN. Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature that probably would not be listedon the phone's spec sheet so we'll probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, orPantech Hotshot are the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
> Thanks in advance... Bob


I'll have to think about "2. The 12: (250 min, 250 texts, 10MB data): $12/month." it's not much more than the $10/month for my family plan although we'd have to factor in the cost of the phone. I am already on the smallest plan Verizon has so there is no going down from there. We use VERY few minutes. Last month we used 231 of 700 minutes AND that includes mobile to mobile, weekends and all that stuff. You can see why I didn't figure I'd needmore minutes even if I added another line.

Bob

Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2012, 02:43 AM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/25/2012 6:47 PM, Agunat wrote:

> I'll have to think about "2. The 12: (250 min, 250 texts, 10MB data): $12/month." it's not much more than the $10/month for my family plan although we'd have to factor in the cost of the phone. I am already on the smallest plan Verizon has so there is no going down from there. We use VERY few minutes. Last month we used 231 of 700 minutes AND that includes mobile to mobile, weekends and all that stuff. You can see why I didn't figure I'd need more minutes even if I added another line.


Ever since Verizon got the iPhone there have been a lot of gently used
Android phones being sold on the used market, generally for around $100.
My kids have the HTC Incredible (the first one, not the Incredible 2)
each bought for $100. My wife and I have the original Motorola Droid,
$100 and $125 respectively. I like the Incredible better.

I look for used smart phones where they've been kept in a case with a
screen protector and hopefully where the previous owner kept the
original box.

Without the need for gaming or movies, even the older Android phones,
with the slower processors, are just fine.

Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-27-2012, 08:07 PM
Agunat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:08:28 PM UTC-4, Agunat wrote:
> My wife needs a phone that will sync with her contact and appointment lists in Outlook 2010 on my home computer. She needs NO DATA PLAN. Verizon says we would have to choose one of their phones listed as "basic" to avoid paying for the data plan. Does anyone know which phone might have that capability? It's kind of a specific feature that probably would not be listedon the phone's spec sheet so we'll probably need someone with personal knowledge. So far it seems as though the Samsung Brightside, LG Extravert, orPantech Hotshot are the best bets although I'm open to other suggestions.
> Thanks in advance... Bob


I do not want to pay for a data plan. Verizon tells me even if I supply myown smartphone I must buy the data plan.

Bob

Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-29-2012, 09:08 PM
landru@posta.rom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:43:54 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/25/2012 6:47 PM, Agunat wrote:
>
>> I'll have to think about "2. The 12: (250 min, 250 texts, 10MB data): $12/month." it's not much more than the $10/month for my family plan although we'd have to factor in the cost of the phone. I am already on the smallest plan Verizon has so there is no going down from there. We use VERY few minutes. Last month we used 231 of 700 minutes AND that includes mobile to mobile, weekends and all that stuff. You can see why I didn't figure I'd need more minutes even if I added another line.

>
>Ever since Verizon got the iPhone there have been a lot of gently used
>Android phones being sold on the used market, generally for around $100.
>My kids have the HTC Incredible (the first one, not the Incredible 2)
>each bought for $100. My wife and I have the original Motorola Droid,
>$100 and $125 respectively. I like the Incredible better.
>
>I look for used smart phones where they've been kept in a case with a
>screen protector and hopefully where the previous owner kept the
>original box.
>
>Without the need for gaming or movies, even the older Android phones,
>with the slower processors, are just fine.
>

Check out Consumer Cellular. They use AT&T towers and has better
coverage than Verizon does (in the areas we travel) If you want a
major phone, you have to pay for it but the service has no contract. I
pay $30/mo for 700 minutes.

I had Verizon and in far too many places my wife had a signal and I
did not. My wife was using T-Mobile.

Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-29-2012, 11:34 PM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/29/2012 2:08 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:

<snip>

> Check out Consumer Cellular.


Has to be the biggest ripoff in the history of cellular. It's AT&T's
network which is much poorer than Verizon's in almost ever area of the
country (check Consumer Reports massive surveys every year on coverage),
and far more expensive than MVNOs on Verizon. Actually, if you stick to
major metro areas AT&T is okay, but you don't want to be out in the
boondocks with GSM.

For AT&T's network, StraightTalk is a far better deal than Consumer
Cellular, with 1000 minutes, 1000 texts, and 30MB of data for $30/month.


Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-30-2012, 07:59 PM
landru@posta.rom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:34:39 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/29/2012 2:08 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Check out Consumer Cellular.

>
>Has to be the biggest ripoff in the history of cellular. It's AT&T's
>network which is much poorer than Verizon's in almost ever area of the
>country (check Consumer Reports massive surveys every year on coverage),
>and far more expensive than MVNOs on Verizon. Actually, if you stick to
>major metro areas AT&T is okay, but you don't want to be out in the
>boondocks with GSM.


You're wrong but what else can a Verizon shill say? I had Verizon and
their coverage is a ripoff. You must have ignored my post: My wife's
T-Mobile had a signal in several places where Verizon service
did not and they were not in a major city.

Verizon is brutal with their payoff penalities. Rather than just bill
me as they did every month automatically they chose to send the bill
to the wrong address, a temporary address they obtained from the post
office, not from me. The next time I dealt with them was through
their credit collection agency who told me Verizon is brutal and there
are thousands of former customers having a similar problem.

Never deal with any company who does not need the buisness. Verizon
has too much business.

Lyle
>
>For AT&T's network, StraightTalk is a far better deal than Consumer
>Cellular, with 1000 minutes, 1000 texts, and 30MB of data for $30/month.


Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-30-2012, 08:15 PM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/30/2012 12:59 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:34:39 -0700, SMS<scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 4/29/2012 2:08 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Check out Consumer Cellular.

>>
>> Has to be the biggest ripoff in the history of cellular. It's AT&T's
>> network which is much poorer than Verizon's in almost ever area of the
>> country (check Consumer Reports massive surveys every year on coverage),
>> and far more expensive than MVNOs on Verizon. Actually, if you stick to
>> major metro areas AT&T is okay, but you don't want to be out in the
>> boondocks with GSM.

>
> You're wrong but what else can a Verizon shill say? I had Verizon and
> their coverage is a ripoff. You must have ignored my post: My wife's
> T-Mobile had a signal in several places where Verizon service
> did not and they were not in a major city.


I do not have Verizon. I'm simply stating the facts about coverage. If
you look at every survey from every non-profit entity for the past ten
years the results are clear. Even AT&T doesn't dispute the facts!

<http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/12/att-ranks-last-survey/>

If you want to use AT&T then at least avoid Consumer Cellular at all
costs. Sign up with StraightTalk which is a much better deal.

With the failure of AT&T's attempt to acquire T-Mobile USA T-Mobile
should improve somewhat. The problem with T-Mobile (and I have a
T-Mobile account) is that in many areas they have no service on their
own network and no roaming on anyone else's network. The merger failure
is supposed to fix some of this since AT&T needs to give T-Mobile
spectrum and roaming. I look forward to this since my T-Mobile service
has gotten worse over the years as AT&T roaming agreements have expired,
even on the outskirts of metro areas.

If you never venture outside a metro area then most carriers are okay.

I currently have five phones on PagePlus and two on T-Mobile.

For $30, no one can touch Pageplus. Besides having superior coverage on
Verizon plus other CDMA networks, you get 100MB of data, 1200 minutes,
and 1200 texts.

Worst case, carry a pay-per-minute Pageplus phone so you have service in
areas where there is no GSM coverage.

Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-30-2012, 08:42 PM
tlvp
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:15:42 -0700, SMS wrote:

> Worst case, carry a pay-per-minute Pageplus phone so you have service in
> areas where there is no GSM coverage.


That's worthwhile advice, even if you're never "in areas where there is no
GSM coverage." Spousal unit finds checking email using the WAP service a
Motorola Q9m gets through Page Plus is far more pleasant than using the
analogous service a RAZR V3 gets through T-Mobile -- AND -- a single $10
PIN has provided that service for its whole 120-day life, w/o running dry.

Getting sorely tempted to just port the T-Mo number over to the Page+ acct.
and be done with T-Mo ... except for the Euro/Asian GSM roaming access T-Mo
provides while we're traveling. Maybe Google Voice would be the answer?
Can you forward Google Voice to a Euro-local or Asia-local prepaid number
while you're using a local prepaid GSM SIM traveling, and then forward it
back to a Page+ number once you're home again?

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 01:06 AM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/30/2012 1:42 PM, tlvp wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:15:42 -0700, SMS wrote:
>
>> Worst case, carry a pay-per-minute Pageplus phone so you have service in
>> areas where there is no GSM coverage.

>
> That's worthwhile advice, even if you're never "in areas where there is no
> GSM coverage." Spousal unit finds checking email using the WAP service a
> Motorola Q9m gets through Page Plus is far more pleasant than using the
> analogous service a RAZR V3 gets through T-Mobile -- AND -- a single $10
> PIN has provided that service for its whole 120-day life, w/o running dry.
>
> Getting sorely tempted to just port the T-Mo number over to the Page+ acct.
> and be done with T-Mo ... except for the Euro/Asian GSM roaming access T-Mo
> provides while we're traveling. Maybe Google Voice would be the answer?
> Can you forward Google Voice to a Euro-local or Asia-local prepaid number
> while you're using a local prepaid GSM SIM traveling, and then forward it
> back to a Page+ number once you're home again?


Google Voice does not allow forwarding to international numbers.
<http://support.google.com/voice/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=115072&topic=1708113&ctx=to pic>

There are a couple of ways around this.

1. Sign up for localphone.com and you'll get a local phone number that
forwards to an international number. Have Google Voice ring your home
phone number which forwards to your localphone.com number which forwards
to your foreign number. Unfortunately you can't add that localphone.com
phone number as one of your Google Voice numbers because there's no way
to verify it.

Landline > localphone.com > International Number

Pageplus > localphone.com > International number

Google Voice > Landline > localphone.com > International number

2. My landline service (not AT&T) allows international forwarding. So if
Google Voice rings my home number it can be forwarded to any number I
want. It's about 9x more expensive per minute than localphone, but still
not outrageous.

Landline > International Number

Pageplus > Landline > International number

Google Voice > Landline > International number

The issue I have with forwarding my landline number is that I get so
many junk phone calls. It's not the money, it's being interrupted at odd
hours.




Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 01:27 AM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/30/2012 6:06 PM, SMS wrote:
> On 4/30/2012 1:42 PM, tlvp wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:15:42 -0700, SMS wrote:
>>
>>> Worst case, carry a pay-per-minute Pageplus phone so you have service in
>>> areas where there is no GSM coverage.

>>
>> That's worthwhile advice, even if you're never "in areas where there
>> is no
>> GSM coverage." Spousal unit finds checking email using the WAP service a
>> Motorola Q9m gets through Page Plus is far more pleasant than using the
>> analogous service a RAZR V3 gets through T-Mobile -- AND -- a single $10
>> PIN has provided that service for its whole 120-day life, w/o running
>> dry.
>>
>> Getting sorely tempted to just port the T-Mo number over to the Page+
>> acct.
>> and be done with T-Mo ... except for the Euro/Asian GSM roaming access
>> T-Mo
>> provides while we're traveling. Maybe Google Voice would be the answer?
>> Can you forward Google Voice to a Euro-local or Asia-local prepaid number
>> while you're using a local prepaid GSM SIM traveling, and then forward it
>> back to a Page+ number once you're home again?

>
> Google Voice does not allow forwarding to international numbers.
> <http://support.google.com/voice/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=115072&topic=1708113&ctx=to pic>
>
>
> There are a couple of ways around this.
>
> 1. Sign up for localphone.com and you'll get a local phone number that
> forwards to an international number. Have Google Voice ring your home
> phone number which forwards to your localphone.com number which forwards
> to your foreign number. Unfortunately you can't add that localphone.com
> phone number as one of your Google Voice numbers because there's no way
> to verify it.


Actually, now that I think of it, it should be possible to verify it.

Once you sign up with localphone.com and assign your foreign prepaid
number to the localphone.com number, and add the localphone.com number
as a Google Voice number, Google Voice will call the localphone.com
number which will call the foreign prepaid number which will ask for
verification. Someone else said that this works.

If the GV verification doesn't work through the forwarding then you
could rent an incoming number from localphone.com (99 per month) and
forward it to whatever number you desire, including international
numbers, and pay for the minutes. Then just forward all your various
numbers to the localphone.com number:

Landline > localphone.com incoming number > prepaid cell phone
Google Voice > localphone.com incoming number > prepaid cell phone
Pageplus > localphone.com incoming number > prepaid cell phone

I think the goal here is for it to be seamless for those calling you.

Strange that Google will not allow forwarding of GV calls to foreign
numbers since you can use GV to call foreign numbers.

Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 03:37 AM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

At 30 Apr 2012 15:59:10 -0400 landru@posta.rom wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:34:39 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 4/29/2012 2:08 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> Check out Consumer Cellular.

> >
> >Has to be the biggest ripoff in the history of cellular. It's AT&T's
> >network which is much poorer than Verizon's in almost ever area of the
> >country (check Consumer Reports massive surveys every year on coverage),


> >and far more expensive than MVNOs on Verizon. Actually, if you stick

to
> >major metro areas AT&T is okay, but you don't want to be out in the
> >boondocks with GSM.

>
> You're wrong but what else can a Verizon shill say? I had Verizon and
> their coverage is a ripoff. You must have ignored my post: My wife's
> T-Mobile had a signal in several places where Verizon service
> did not and they were not in a major city.


I use T-Mo, both contract and prepaid, and Verizon (via Page Plus), and
while, like your wife, I've had T-Mo coverage where there was no Verizon,
those times are vastly outnumbered by times Verizon works where T-Mo
doesn't. (Rural New Mexico, in my experience, has lousy Verizon coverage,
but great T-Mo coverage because T-Mo roams on a regional GSM carrier
called Plateau Wireless, throughout the area. But ask yourself why I can
only think of *one* example in my travels where Verizon lags behind T-Mo
over a fairly large area.)


> Verizon is brutal with their payoff penalities. Rather than just bill
> me as they did every month automatically they chose to send the bill
> to the wrong address, a temporary address they obtained from the post
> office, not from me. The next time I dealt with them was through
> their credit collection agency who told me Verizon is brutal and there
> are thousands of former customers having a similar problem.


So you think Verizon intentionally misroutes bills because they'd rather
send collection agencies after customers later, to collect $0.20 on the
dollar, than to simply get paid in full for service on time.

Obviously you were burned by some systemic or billing error, which, while
unfortunate, has nothing to do with theircoverage, and obviously has
colored your judgment wrt to the quality of their service.


> Never deal with any company who does not need the buisness. Verizon
> has too much business.



They have about as much business as the comparative saints over at AT&T
who are powering your Consumer Cellular service.



Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 06:30 AM
tlvp
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 21:37:44 -0600, Todd Allcock asked:

> ... you think Verizon intentionally misroutes bills because they'd rather
> send collection agencies after customers later, to collect $0.20 on the
> dollar, than to simply get paid in full for service on time [?]


Let me tell you just how easy it is to get a bill unintentionally misrouted
-- some years ago, a phlebotomy lab's bill for a routine blood draw just
never turned up, for months and months. Finally a phone call from the lab's
billing office came, threatening to turn "the bill" over to Collections if
we didn't pay it. Ah, but what bill? Oh, the bill they'd sent us monthly
for the past nine months to our home address. And that address? Oh, same
street name as our street -- phonetically -- but misspelled, so that the
automatic ZIP-code verification software "corrected" the ZIP code to that
of a neighboring town with a street in it by that spelling, where, as
undeliverable presorted first class mail, it was probably dead-lettered.
Or maybe delivered to someone who repeatedly tossed it as irrelevant.

A simple variation from Smythe Street to Smith Street can do that, and the
resultant ZIP code change, from 07811 to 07815, say, can prove disastrous.

Happened here, so now we double-check all billing offices transcriptions of
our street name ... *and* of our ZIP code :-) .

Maybe happened to OP as well.

Oh, and that phlebotomy lab's bill? Once they sent it to *our* address, and
not their munged version thereof, we paid it in full, obviously. After all,
who wants to deal with a Collections agency :-) ?

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 06:35 AM
tlvp
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:06:46 -0700, SMS wrote:

> On 4/30/2012 1:42 PM, tlvp wrote:
>>
>> ... Getting sorely tempted to just port the T-Mo number over to the Page+ acct.
>> and be done with T-Mo ... except for the Euro/Asian GSM roaming access T-Mo
>> provides while we're traveling. Maybe Google Voice would be the answer?
>> Can you forward Google Voice to a Euro-local or Asia-local prepaid number
>> while you're using a local prepaid GSM SIM traveling, and then forward it
>> back to a Page+ number once you're home again?

>
> Google Voice does not allow forwarding to international numbers.
> <http://support.google.com/voice/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=115072&topic=1708113&ctx=to pic>
>
> There are a couple of ways around this.
>
> 1. Sign up for localphone.com and you'll get a local phone number that
> forwards to an international number. Have Google Voice ring your home
> phone number which forwards to your localphone.com number which forwards
> to your foreign number. Unfortunately you can't add that localphone.com
> phone number as one of your Google Voice numbers because there's no way
> to verify it.
>
> Landline > localphone.com > International Number
>
> Pageplus > localphone.com > International number
>
> Google Voice > Landline > localphone.com > International number
>
> 2. My landline service (not AT&T) allows international forwarding. So if
> Google Voice rings my home number it can be forwarded to any number I
> want. It's about 9x more expensive per minute than localphone, but still
> not outrageous.
>
> Landline > International Number
>
> Pageplus > Landline > International number
>
> Google Voice > Landline > International number
>
> The issue I have with forwarding my landline number is that I get so
> many junk phone calls. It's not the money, it's being interrupted at odd
> hours.


Interesting (along with your follow-on note) strategies, sms. Thanks.

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 03:58 PM
sms88
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/30/2012 8:37 PM, Todd Allcock wrote:

> I use T-Mo, both contract and prepaid, and Verizon (via Page Plus), and
> while, like your wife, I've had T-Mo coverage where there was no Verizon,
> those times are vastly outnumbered by times Verizon works where T-Mo
> doesn't. (Rural New Mexico, in my experience, has lousy Verizon coverage,
> but great T-Mo coverage because T-Mo roams on a regional GSM carrier
> called Plateau Wireless, throughout the area. But ask yourself why I can
> only think of *one* example in my travels where Verizon lags behind T-Mo
> over a fairly large area.)


Alaska might be another place where GSM has an edge. Last time I was
there there was no GSM at all, even though the rest of the country had
it. You had great AMPS coverage, plus excellent TDMA coverage and decent
CDMA coverage. But all that TDMA coverage finally became GSM coverage,
and I don't know if AMPS is still on in Alaska (it's a particularly good
place for AMPS because of the sparse population and long distances).

> So you think Verizon intentionally misroutes bills because they'd rather
> send collection agencies after customers later, to collect $0.20 on the
> dollar, than to simply get paid in full for service on time.


LOL, obviously a ridiculous story. No carrier "chooses" to misdirect
bills, and as you point out they get only a fraction of anything
collected by a collection agency. But at least it explains why he is
making up all the coverage stories!

I would probably never go back to Verizon proper, but among the top tier
carriers, I think that Verizon has tended to be the least bad in their
policies for the following reasons:

1. They were the last carrier to impose an LNP fee, and when they did so
it was less than the other carriers.

2. They were the last carrier to impose a phone upgrade fee, and it's
the second lowest of the top four carriers.

3. They rolled out their LTE network the fastest, leaving the other
three carriers far behind (Sprint and T-Mobile haven't even started).

4. While AT&T imposed throttling (on grandfathered unlimited plans)
based solely on data quantity, Verizon throttles only if two conditions
are met: 1) you exceed a certain threshold of data usage AND 2) the
cells you are connected to are congested. This is a fairer system.

5. Verizon's advertising is less sleazy than AT&T's. You saw how AT&T
got so upset when Verizon started comparing 3G coverage ("There's a Map
for That"), even suing Verizon over it. I'm sure that Verizon planned
that whole thing. By AT&T suing them, and having to explain "yeah the 3G
part is true but Verizon didn't explain that we have 2G coverage in all
those areas where we don't have 3G" AT&T just made things worse.

Of course the granddaddy of AT&T (nee Cingular) ad campaigns was the
"fewest dropped calls" where even the company they hired to measure
dropped call rates said that it wasn't true. The current AT&T ad
campaign claiming that they have the fastest data for iPhone is pretty
clever. Since there is no 4G iPhone yet, and since AT&T's 3G network is
faster than Verizon's, at least the premise of the ads is correct.

And let's not forget the incredible saga of AT&T attempt to acquire
T-Mobile USA. Donating money to an array of non-profit groups who wrote
strange letters explaining how the acquisition was so important.
<http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/06/10/report-non-profits-who-supported-attt-mobile-merger-took-att-money/>.
And even after the acquisition failed, because AT&T's claims of the
benefits were so implausible, they still didn't stop with the smarminess
<http://attpublicpolicy.com/wireless/att-statement-on-t-mobile-closing-seven-call-centers/>.
Jim Cicconi is really a piece of work.

> Obviously you were burned by some systemic or billing error, which, while
> unfortunate, has nothing to do with theircoverage, and obviously has
> colored your judgment wrt to the quality of their service.


Very true.

> They have about as much business as the comparative saints over at AT&T
> who are powering your Consumer Cellular service.


What's strange is that anyone that wanted the AT&T network would sign up
with Consumer Cellular versus one of the less expensive MVNOs that use
AT&T's network. StraightTalk is a much better deal. RedPocket can be a
better deal if you need data. Of course for a lightly used phone that
has the greatest coverage, Pageplus is by far the best. I'm actually
surprised that Verizon even allows them to continue. There have been a
lot of instances of top tier carriers discontinuing relationships with
an MVNO.

Verizon does tend to sometimes have the supply and demand attitude of
the oil companies, "We have all the supply, so we can demand whatever
the $%^& we want." Even without the iPhone for several years that AT&T
had it, Verizon had no problem with churn or net additions because so
many of their customers had vowed to never to return to
AT&T/Cingular--coverage and quality trumped the handset selection.

Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 04:06 PM
sms88
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/30/2012 11:30 PM, tlvp wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 21:37:44 -0600, Todd Allcock asked:
>
>> ... you think Verizon intentionally misroutes bills because they'd rather
>> send collection agencies after customers later, to collect $0.20 on the
>> dollar, than to simply get paid in full for service on time [?]

>
> Let me tell you just how easy it is to get a bill unintentionally misrouted
> -- some years ago, a phlebotomy lab's bill for a routine blood draw just
> never turned up, for months and months. Finally a phone call from the lab's
> billing office came, threatening to turn "the bill" over to Collections if
> we didn't pay it. Ah, but what bill? Oh, the bill they'd sent us monthly
> for the past nine months to our home address. And that address? Oh, same
> street name as our street -- phonetically -- but misspelled, so that the
> automatic ZIP-code verification software "corrected" the ZIP code to that
> of a neighboring town with a street in it by that spelling, where, as
> undeliverable presorted first class mail, it was probably dead-lettered.
> Or maybe delivered to someone who repeatedly tossed it as irrelevant.


It certainly can happen, but it's absurd to claim that it's intentional,
and designed to extract more money. If a creditor doesn't have a good
address one of the first thing's they do is to contact the post office
to see if there is a forwarding address where forwarding has expired.
Once it goes to collections the original creditor loses at least half
the money.

I had a doctor's office send a bill to collections. For over a year I
had told the doctor's office that they were billing the wrong insurance
company (my wife's pre-marriage insurance company even though she was
under my policy when the services were performed). It was just hopeless
because the doctor contracted out their billing to some home-based
billing service that was clueless and had no contact information. When
it finally went to collections I was able to tell the collection agency
what the problem was and they took care of it. I suspect by then it was
actually too late to submit the bill to the proper insurance company so
it was probably just written off.

Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 06:27 PM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 4/30/2012 8:37 PM, Todd Allcock wrote:

> They have about as much business as the comparative saints over at AT&T
> who are powering your Consumer Cellular service.


To a light user, any of the prepaid services can sound good, considering
the lowest cost contract plan from a top tier carrier.

The prepaid provider with most or cleverest advertising, and the widest
availability, can gain a lot of subscribers even if it's much more
costly than less well-advertised alternatives. Hence services like
Tracfone, Consumer Cellular, and Jitterbug are able to remain in
business serving less well-informed consumers. Once a customer has
service with a provider there's a resistance to switching (plus you have
some people that get extremely upset if someone points out that they are
paying a lot more than they have to!).

There's something (though not much) to be said about being able to walk
into Walgreen's, Target, or WalMart and buy a Tracfone versus signing up
for a service like Pageplus (though going to a Pageplus dealer isn't all
that tough either--personally I can walk to one in about ten minutes).

Those that do a lot of research prior to making such a purchase are not
the target customers of Tracfone, Consumer Cellular, and Jitterbug.
Those people have several choices:

If they're an extremely light user, and can live with T-Mobile coverage,
than nothing beats T-Mobile prepaid at as low as 79/month. The per
minute cost is high, but the minimum cost is the lowest.

If they need the best possible coverage then Pageplus (Verizon +
roaming), at as low $2.38/month is the best choice.

If they need a lot of data then StraightTalk (AT&T+roaming) or RedPocket
(AT&T) are good choices.

The other way of looking at it is what you get for a certain amount of
money, i.e. $30:

Consumer Cellular: 700 minutes ($2.50 for 100 texts and 10MB of data)
Pageplus: 1200 minutes, 3000 texts, 100MB data
StraightTalk: 1000 minutes, 1000 texts, 30MB data
RedPocket: 250 minutes, unlimited texts, 10MB data
Jitterbug ($40): 400 minutes (texts are 10 each, no data)
Tracfone: 200 minutes (texting cost varies)

You can pay anywhere from 2.5-15/minute, a 600% difference!

Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 08:45 PM
landru@posta.rom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:15:42 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/30/2012 12:59 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:34:39 -0700, SMS<scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/29/2012 2:08 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Check out Consumer Cellular.
>>>
>>> Has to be the biggest ripoff in the history of cellular. It's AT&T's
>>> network which is much poorer than Verizon's in almost ever area of the
>>> country (check Consumer Reports massive surveys every year on coverage),
>>> and far more expensive than MVNOs on Verizon. Actually, if you stick to
>>> major metro areas AT&T is okay, but you don't want to be out in the
>>> boondocks with GSM.

>>
>> You're wrong but what else can a Verizon shill say? I had Verizon and
>> their coverage is a ripoff. You must have ignored my post: My wife's
>> T-Mobile had a signal in several places where Verizon service
>> did not and they were not in a major city.

>
>I do not have Verizon. I'm simply stating the facts about coverage. If
>you look at every survey from every non-profit entity for the past ten
>years the results are clear. Even AT&T doesn't dispute the facts!
>

I did and as I reported, I had no coverage in areas where my wife did.
><http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/12/att-ranks-last-survey/>
>
>If you want to use AT&T then at least avoid Consumer Cellular at all
>costs. Sign up with StraightTalk which is a much better deal.
>

Never heard of straight talk and I don't know anyone with it. We are
retired and travel the entire US by RV. We talk with a lot of Rv'ers
and Consumer Cellular is their recommendatoin as well as mine. The
reports you read have to do with the network of texting, internet
service and from what I've heard, Verizon is on top however when it
comes to just plain telephone calls, Verizon has a lot of dark areas.
All I do with a cell phone is make and receive telephone calls. I do
not accept or send text messages nor do I go on the internet. When I
was having trouble with Verizon I spoke to a friend who worked for one
of the Telephone companies and I asked a simple question, "What cell
system will give me the least trouble. His answer was AT&T and he was
correct. I never had trouble with AT&T. Only reason I changed was that
I learned Consumer cellular uses the AT&T network so if AT&T works, so
will they work and they do.

I am in my 8th state right now and we just completed a move of some
2300 miles. My Consumer Cellular did the job, I have no complaints.
My wife's T-Mobile I can tell you why she doesn't change, and that is
her family is on it so there are some free calling within their own
system. However she still has blind spots now and then. I changed for
one reason only. I paid $55 a month for AT&T and I Pay Consumer Cell
$33 a month for the same amount of minutes. I have nothing against any
of them as long as I get a signal. Verizon advertises all these
little men running around testing signals. Great. Hire some more and
mean it.

>With the failure of AT&T's attempt to acquire T-Mobile USA T-Mobile
>should improve somewhat. The problem with T-Mobile (and I have a
>T-Mobile account) is that in many areas they have no service on their
>own network and no roaming on anyone else's network. The merger failure
>is supposed to fix some of this since AT&T needs to give T-Mobile
>spectrum and roaming. I look forward to this since my T-Mobile service
>has gotten worse over the years as AT&T roaming agreements have expired,
>even on the outskirts of metro areas.
>
>If you never venture outside a metro area then most carriers are okay.
>

We never had a problem within any metro area. You seem to continue to
harp on this. We travel the entire US, from N.J. to California to
Florida with Colorado and Arizona in there. ALL of our complaints are
outside of any metro area. Not enough people? Not enough signal.
>
>I currently have five phones on PagePlus and two on T-Mobile.
>

I have no need for that. We are two people with two phones.
>
>For $30, no one can touch Pageplus. Besides having superior coverage on
>Verizon plus other CDMA networks, you get 100MB of data, 1200 minutes,
>and 1200 texts.
>

I"ve never heard of Pageplus and I probably won't change networks for
a $3-5 dollar savings. The main attraction for me with Consumer is no
contract. Yes, if I wanted a super phone with all the bells and
whistles, I would have to pay for it with Consumer but if I didn't
like them, I wouldn't have to pay for something I wasn't using or pay
a penalty because of a contract. I leave and take my phone with me.

>Worst case, carry a pay-per-minute Pageplus phone so you have service in
>areas where there is no GSM coverage.


I had a pay-per-minute phone a long time ago. We were living in the
Denver area and in Denver it was fine. The moment we left there was no
phone until we returned. One more Verizon issue that was similar to
the Denver report. When we lived in Conifer, Colorado, (in the
mountians) I had to drive down to Safeway to use my Verizon phone. Or,
I could drive to the top of Conifer Mountain and get a signal there. I
also had a company phone then, AT&T and it worked just fine. We moved
to Oregon and went round and round with pay by minutes. Their phone
worked as soon as we left the house. In the house or on the property,
no signal. They sent card after card and nothing did any good. I was
in a shopping center and spoke to a Verizon saleman who swore on all
that's holy that if I get a Verizon contract, I would have no trouble.
He lied. I lost the phone on the way to NJ. I was
in Indiana when I beleive the phone left my lap for the parking lot in
a rest stop. As soon as I realized it was gone, I called to stop the
phone so no one could use it. I also told them I was thinking of
trying another service because I wasn't satisfied with them. My
account was put on hold and I took an AT&T phone service. To tell the
truth, I forgot about Verizon but that's no excuse for what they did.
They were due the dubby payment for cutting out early. Fine, they had
my checking account numbers and could have simply deducted what they
wanted. Instead they sent me a bill. Here was the problem. I left the
state of Oregon for Arizona. I was in Arizona so long with mail on
hold in Oregon that I became concerned. I put in a change of address
to a USP post office box in Cottonwood. I had for one month. During
that time, they must have sent me a bill to my house in Oregon. Not
being there, the bill was forwarded to the temporary box in Cottonwood
but....by the time I would have received it, I had cancelled the
temporary box because I bought a house and had a real address. The
address Verizon sent that bill to was one they got from the post
office, not from me. All mail in those temp boxes is destroyed and not
forwarded so I never saw a bill, and forgot it until I saw it on my
credit report. I tried talking to them and they laughed at me. Pay the
bill.

Now, here's a real tip: If that ever happens to anyone, DO NOT PAY
the bill once it's in collection and on your credit report because
your report will be damaged whether or not you pay it. If you want to
pay it, make their collection agency put it in writing that they will
remove the negative report from your credit report DO NOT take their
word for it. But you don't have to pay it. IF they actually take you
to court, let them, explain what happened in a court room and you'll
come out on top. I have a lawyer in the family and that is what he
told me to do.

You put up quite a defence for Verizon whom you say you do no business
with. Stay with your Verizon all you wish or any number of other phone
services. I talk to fellow RV'ers and if they like what they have,
I'll probably go with them. In some RV parks they have high speed
internet. For that I use my MagicJack and most of the time, it works
just fine. If not, I do have a cell phone and it works well too.
Regards, and good luck,
Lyle

Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 09:36 PM
landru@posta.rom
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Tue, 01 May 2012 08:58:37 -0700, sms88 <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
> So you think Verizon intentionally misroutes bills because they'd rather
>> send collection agencies after customers later, to collect $0.20 on the
>> dollar, than to simply get paid in full for service on time.

>

I've been trying to find where I (or anyone) thought or accused
Verison of intentionally misrouting a bill. Exactly where was that
said and by whom? You're right whoever stated that is rediculous.
>
>LOL, obviously a ridiculous story. No carrier "chooses" to misdirect
>bills, and as you point out they get only a fraction of anything
>collected by a collection agency. But at least it explains why he is
>making up all the coverage stories!
>

The true story is that Verizon had "address correction" orders on
one of it's bills. They corrected my address from Oregon to an
address in Cottonwood. I waited a month and then cancelled the
temporary address. I never gave it to Verizon, only the Oregon
Post Office so I could get my mail. I then sent another change of
address for the new and real one (not in Cottonwood) and Verizon never
bothered to pick up on the real address. Now all that being said,
the botton line: They had my banking informatoin. All they had to do
was ACH bill my bank and pay themselves. That is if they really wanted
to get paid or were more interested in punishing me because I didn't
like their service. It that rediculous, probably but the real problem
was they chose not to pay themselves. They sent a bill and expected me
to pay it which I would have by automatic payment.

Consumer reports may be an excellent publication but I rely on people
I meet and ask them how they like their phone service. If you goto to
the link provided in this thread, it stated that the best consumer
reports they had were about Consumer Cellular regardless of what you
people think or don't think about them. I had troubles with Verizon in
several places in several states from coast to coast. Stick with
whomever you like and I will do the same. Until I have trouble with
Consumer Cellular, I'll remain with them. They also automatically
upped my plan when I was using a lot of minutes. They sent me an email
and told me that at the current rate, I would use up my 700 minutes so
they raised me to 1200. At that rate, they were still lower than my
AT&T bill by $11. I have since then dropped back to 700 and now safe
$22 a month and the service works just fine.

Lyle.
>I would probably never go back to Verizon proper, but among the top tier
>carriers, I think that Verizon has tended to be the least bad in their
>policies for the following reasons:
>
>1. They were the last carrier to impose an LNP fee, and when they did so
>it was less than the other carriers.
>
>2. They were the last carrier to impose a phone upgrade fee, and it's
>the second lowest of the top four carriers.
>
>3. They rolled out their LTE network the fastest, leaving the other
>three carriers far behind (Sprint and T-Mobile haven't even started).
>
>4. While AT&T imposed throttling (on grandfathered unlimited plans)
>based solely on data quantity, Verizon throttles only if two conditions
>are met: 1) you exceed a certain threshold of data usage AND 2) the
>cells you are connected to are congested. This is a fairer system.
>
>5. Verizon's advertising is less sleazy than AT&T's. You saw how AT&T
>got so upset when Verizon started comparing 3G coverage ("There's a Map
>for That"), even suing Verizon over it. I'm sure that Verizon planned
>that whole thing. By AT&T suing them, and having to explain "yeah the 3G
>part is true but Verizon didn't explain that we have 2G coverage in all
>those areas where we don't have 3G" AT&T just made things worse.
>
>Of course the granddaddy of AT&T (nee Cingular) ad campaigns was the
>"fewest dropped calls" where even the company they hired to measure
>dropped call rates said that it wasn't true. The current AT&T ad
>campaign claiming that they have the fastest data for iPhone is pretty
>clever. Since there is no 4G iPhone yet, and since AT&T's 3G network is
>faster than Verizon's, at least the premise of the ads is correct.
>
>And let's not forget the incredible saga of AT&T attempt to acquire
>T-Mobile USA. Donating money to an array of non-profit groups who wrote
>strange letters explaining how the acquisition was so important.
><http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/06/10/report-non-profits-who-supported-attt-mobile-merger-took-att-money/>.
>And even after the acquisition failed, because AT&T's claims of the
>benefits were so implausible, they still didn't stop with the smarminess
><http://attpublicpolicy.com/wireless/att-statement-on-t-mobile-closing-seven-call-centers/>.
>Jim Cicconi is really a piece of work.
>
>> Obviously you were burned by some systemic or billing error, which, while
>> unfortunate, has nothing to do with theircoverage, and obviously has
>> colored your judgment wrt to the quality of their service.

>
>Very true.
>
>> They have about as much business as the comparative saints over at AT&T
>> who are powering your Consumer Cellular service.

>
>What's strange is that anyone that wanted the AT&T network would sign up
>with Consumer Cellular versus one of the less expensive MVNOs that use
>AT&T's network. StraightTalk is a much better deal. RedPocket can be a
>better deal if you need data. Of course for a lightly used phone that
>has the greatest coverage, Pageplus is by far the best. I'm actually
>surprised that Verizon even allows them to continue. There have been a
>lot of instances of top tier carriers discontinuing relationships with
>an MVNO.
>
>Verizon does tend to sometimes have the supply and demand attitude of
>the oil companies, "We have all the supply, so we can demand whatever
>the $%^& we want." Even without the iPhone for several years that AT&T
>had it, Verizon had no problem with churn or net additions because so
>many of their customers had vowed to never to return to
>AT&T/Cingular--coverage and quality trumped the handset selection.


Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 10:00 PM
XS11E
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

landru@posta.rom wrote:

> however when it comes to just plain telephone calls, Verizon
> has a lot of dark areas.


But not NEARLY as many as Consumer Cellular or AT&T. SWMBO has
Consumer Cellular and I've had 3 or more bars in every place she's been
unable to make a call (Including such remote, out of the way places as
Las Vegas!)

My son was a commercial pilot and at evey stop members of the flight
crew with AT&T or Sprint or T-Mo had to use his VZW phone to make a
call from the airport.

Your experience is VERY untypical, I've travelled over much the US and
never had a VZW dead spot so far....


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2012, 11:29 PM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 5/1/2012 1:45 PM, landru@posta.rom wrote:

> Never heard of straight talk and I don't know anyone with it. We are
> retired and travel the entire US by RV.


You definitely want to avoid AT&T if you're an RVer. RVers may argue
about the merits of fifth wheel versus a Class A, B, or C, motor home,
but one thing they _ALL_ agree on is that you want to stick with Verizon
for wireless service and avoid AT&T at all costs.

See: <http://www.rvforum.net/SMF_forum/index.php?topic=36823.0>

"I have AT&T...this past summer, traveled for 3 months, primarily
Colorado/Eastern Utah/Northern Arizona....and I didn't have cell
reception about 70% of the time...so much for AT&T's claim they cover
95% of the world! I must travel in that other 5%.

What was frustrating is that I couldn't get a signal at all, yet the guy
next to me was sitting at his picnic table gabbing away on his cell
phone. Most of the times I ran into this, they told me they were on
Verizon."

and

"AT&T is sneakier than that: they claim to cover 95% of the people-as
long as they stay home in the cities."

and

"We're in the Four Corners area. We travel mainly west of here and
north. Verizon is the only way to go in most of the places around here.
And there are still places where there is NO coverage."

and

"AT&T is a nightmare, i seem to travel in their 5% of no-covereage 95%
of the time. I have the AT&T internet. They claim it roams and they
pay roaming fees, but it doesn't roam. I've been nearly right under
towers and had AT&T crap out continually."

The problem with AT&T is their rating of coverage by percentage of the
population covered. This is a problem because most people live in urban
areas, but where RV coverage often matters most is outside urban areas.

Now there is one advantage to AT&T that I've found. In California State
Parks the Wi-Fi service is provided by AT&T and it's only free to AT&T
customers (wireless or U-Verse or some levels of DSL service).

You may be the first and only RVer to ever think that AT&T had better
coverage. Contact them and they can do a commercial with you as a
spokesperson. Whatever you do, get yourself onto StraightTalk if you
continue on AT&T's network <http://www.straighttalk.com/ServicePlans>.
I'm surprised that you haven't heard of it. It's widely advertised. Sold
only at Wal-Mart. It's one of Tracfone's brands. The $30 plan is a much
better deal than Consumer Cellular. The $45 plan has one "gotcha" in
that the supposedly "unlimited" data really isn't, and if you use
excessive data they will contact you and warn you to lower your use.
"Excessive" is undefined, but is believed to be around 2GB.


Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 05-02-2012, 02:29 AM
Paul Miner
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Tue, 01 May 2012 16:29:46 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

(some snippage follows)

>Whatever you do, get yourself onto StraightTalk if you continue
>on AT&T's network <http://www.straighttalk.com/ServicePlans>.
>The $30 plan is a much better deal than Consumer Cellular.


Like the OP, I'm (still) on Consumer Cellular and probably won't be
switching to StraightTalk because it appears to be significantly more
expensive. ST apparently gives more minutes, more texts, and maybe
even more data, but at a much higher monthly cost. My CC bill is under
$40 a month for two phones, and we don't use 100% of the minutes,
texts, and data as it is. From the link provided above, it doesn't
appear that ST can come anywhere near that.

(Yes, I'm still planning to move to PagePlus eventually, but haven't
taken the leap yet. The initial out of pocket handset cost is a
temporary sticking point.)

--
Paul Miner

Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 05-02-2012, 02:09 PM
sms88
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On 5/1/2012 7:29 PM, Paul Miner wrote:

> Like the OP, I'm (still) on Consumer Cellular and probably won't be
> switching to StraightTalk because it appears to be significantly more
> expensive.


Consumer Cellular has some lower cost plans than StraightTalk. But the
OP was on their $30 plan, which is an especially poor deal.

> (Yes, I'm still planning to move to PagePlus eventually, but haven't
> taken the leap yet. The initial out of pocket handset cost is a
> temporary sticking point.)


Perhaps, but every month you wait you're spending extra money that could
go to the cost of the handset, money you can never get back.

The reason I switched to Pageplus was not the cost. We do a lot of long
road trips to more remote areas and the other carriers were simply not
options because of their coverage issues in those areas. We are not
RVers, but we go to a lot of the same type of places that RVers like to
go to and have seen the same problems that RVers have found with
non-Verizon network carriers. Even within the greater SF Bay Area there
are a lot of undeveloped areas where the only coverage is from Verizon
(whether you get it with Sprint roaming, Pageplus, or other roaming).

If we go on a long trip with another family that does not use the
Verizon network, I lend them my spare Pageplus phone that I keep active
so we can keep in contact. It's $28.50 per year well spent.

I think the reason things developed in the U.S. the way they did is
because so many of the rural carriers decided to move to CDMA rather
than GSM due to the fact that they could cover more area with fewer
towers with CDMA, even though the CDMA equipment was a bit more
expensive. The downside with Pageplus is that these end up being roaming
areas, but paying for occasional roaming is fine, and better than having
no coverage at all.

Sprint with roaming would have been okay in those areas, but
paradoxically, Sprint's bigger issue is that they have programmed their
handsets to not roam in areas where Sprint has a network that is present
but often not usable (older handsets could be forced to roam, but not
newer ones).

Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 05-02-2012, 06:39 PM
Paul Miner
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Sync a basic phone with Outlook?

On Wed, 02 May 2012 07:09:23 -0700, sms88 <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 5/1/2012 7:29 PM, Paul Miner wrote:
>
>> Like the OP, I'm (still) on Consumer Cellular and probably won't be
>> switching to StraightTalk because it appears to be significantly more
>> expensive.

>
>Consumer Cellular has some lower cost plans than StraightTalk. But the
>OP was on their $30 plan, which is an especially poor deal.


Got it, sorry. I incorrectly focused on just the lowest cost plans.

>> (Yes, I'm still planning to move to PagePlus eventually, but haven't
>> taken the leap yet. The initial out of pocket handset cost is a
>> temporary sticking point.)

>
>Perhaps, but every month you wait you're spending extra money that could
>go to the cost of the handset, money you can never get back.
>
>The reason I switched to Pageplus was not the cost. We do a lot of long
>road trips to more remote areas and the other carriers were simply not
>options because of their coverage issues in those areas. We are not
>RVers, but we go to a lot of the same type of places that RVers like to
>go to and have seen the same problems that RVers have found with
>non-Verizon network carriers. Even within the greater SF Bay Area there
>are a lot of undeveloped areas where the only coverage is from Verizon
>(whether you get it with Sprint roaming, Pageplus, or other roaming).


I have no problem with at&t's coverage, just like I had no problem
with Sprint's coverage before at&t. It has been extremely rare that
I've been unable to make a call when I want to, and I'm of the old
school mentality where I remember a time when people didn't have
personal phones. I haven't worn a watch since March 1983, (broke it in
a motorcycle accident that day at 3:09 PM and never replaced it), so
my primary use of a cell phone is so I know what time it is. The fact
that I can make or receive a call now and then is almost gravy. Yes, a
cell phone is an expensive watch.

--
Paul Miner

Reply With Quote
Reply


« OT (sort of): iPhone 5, or maybe 6, on the Apple Network? | Get iPhone from Verizon and then don't use it? »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FYI: HTC ExtUSB connector and USB cables John Navas alt.cellular.sprintpcs 279 02-07-2011 02:18 PM
FYI: HTC ExtUSB connector and USB cables John Navas alt.cellular.t-mobile 292 02-07-2011 02:18 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45