 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Cingular / July 2003PCS service
I just don't get it. PCS stands for Personal Communcation system or something like that. That being the case Sprint phones can be called PCS, but so can a walkie talkie, or a baby monitor. So what is the difference between Sprint and Cingular? Is it just because Sprint phones are CDMA and Cingular is for example TDMA, or GSM? I mean beside the restrictions on PCS service. The quality in my area seems to suck for Sprint, but in other areas it seems to be better than Cingular. They advertise the are the nations only all digital/All PCS network. Well, now other cellular carriers have Digital, but Sprint's "PCS" service, are they refering to the CDMA network? Thanks, >So what is the >difference between Sprint and Cingular? Well, ALL of Sprint is PCS (1900 MHZ) and Sprint uses CDMA technology. Cingular on the other hand is 1900 MHZ PCS and in some areas 800MHz Cellular. Their system is a mixture of GSM and TDMA/AMPS. AMPS of course is analog. So in that regard, Sprint is al digital all PCS. And it is the only one that was built brand new from the ground up in recent years. Of course T-Mobile is also an all digital PCS system but they have aquired a lot of different companies to make up what they are today. As for Cingular, in the various markets their parent companies were the wireline carriers so they have an imbeded "legacy" system of TDMA and AMPS. They are moving into the GSM arena by overbuilding these legacy systems. As for the distinction, PCS simply means 1900 MHz where cellular is 800 MHz. -- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net > >So what is the > >difference between Sprint and Cingular? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > As for the distinction, PCS simply means 1900 MHz where cellular is 800 MHz. If I remember corectly too, 800 MHz is actually better than 1900 MHz when it comes to penetrating buildings and such. Thanks for the information. I was not sure if I was thinking correctly, but I guess I was. Thanks, Fred >If I remember corectly too, 800 MHz is actually better than 1900 MHz >when it comes to penetrating buildings and such. Well, keep in mind that with all things being equal, the lower the frequency the better distance and the better building penetration. The unfortunate (or maybe fortunate depending on how you look at it) part is is that everyone isn't on the same tower so all is seldom equal. The 1900MHz site might be across the street and work better in your building... -- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net >>If I remember corectly too, 800 MHz is actually better than 1900 MHz >>when it comes to penetrating buildings and such. > >Well, keep in mind that with all things being equal, the lower the frequency >the better distance and the better building penetration. It's not that simple -- higher frequencies penetrate small openings (e.g., windows) better than lower frequencies. >The unfortunate (or maybe fortunate depending on how you look at it) part is is >that everyone isn't on the same tower so all is seldom equal. The 1900MHz site >might be across the street and work better in your building... True.  SignatureBest regards, John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular [....] > They advertise the are the nations only all digital/All PCS network. > Well, now other cellular carriers have Digital, but Sprint's "PCS" > service, are they refering to the CDMA network? I have no idea what they're referring to, nor do I even care. It's a commercial advert, and it's worth exactly what you paid to see it. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273 "All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of what we know." -- Richard Wilbur >I just don't get it. PCS stands for Personal Communcation system or >something like that. That being the case Sprint phones can be called >PCS, but so can a walkie talkie, or a baby monitor. So what is the >difference between Sprint and Cingular? No, a walky-talky or a baby monitor cannot be called PCS unless they use PCS spectrum (1900 Mhz.) *Some* of cingular is PCS or at least is by definition. Any carrier that operates at 1900 Mhz is PCS. Sprint PCS happens to use it in their name of their service. >Is it just because Sprint phones are CDMA and Cingular is for example >TDMA, or GSM? I mean beside the restrictions on PCS service. The >quality in my area seems to suck for Sprint, but in other areas it >seems to be better than Cingular. PCS can be on any technology whether it's CDMA, TDMA or GSM. By its very definition PCS is any carrier who uses 1900 Mhz transmission. 800 Mhz is "cellular" by definition. >They advertise the are the nations only all digital/All PCS network. >Well, now other cellular carriers have Digital, but Sprint's "PCS" >service, are they refering to the CDMA network? Despite their ads that they are all digital all PCS it's just not so. T-Mobile is also all digital and is also a PCS and it runs GSM at 1900 Mhz. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group >Despite their ads that they are all digital all PCS it's just not so. >T-Mobile is also all digital and is also a PCS and it runs GSM at 1900 >Mhz. Actually Sprint PCS ads say that they are the only "All digital All PCS built from the ground up". Although T-Mobile also falls in to the all PCS category, it was not "built from the ground up", it was built, bought and piecmealed together to be what it is today. Where Sprint PCS has one equipment manufacturer nationwide T-Mobile has at least 3 that I know of. So Sprints claim to be the only one "built from the ground up" is absolutly true. It is confusing for the neophyte however! -- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote in article <20030728111354.06855.00000652@mb-m06.aol.com>: > >Despite their ads that they are all digital all PCS it's just not so. > >T-Mobile is also all digital and is also a PCS and it runs GSM at 1900 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the ground up", it was built, bought and piecmealed together to be what it is > today. Note that Sprint PCS relies heavily on PCS affiliates in some areas (a practice that is causing them grief right now as several of their affiliates are in financial trouble). T-Mobile would have as much of a claim to say that they build an all-digital, all PCS network as Sprint. Nextel also claims that they built an all digital network but of course it is not PCS. > So Sprints claim to be the only one "built from the ground up" is absolutly > true. It is confusing for the neophyte however! It's especially confusing because they try to make is appear as if PCS is somehow an advantage, where it actually is a tremendous disadvantage in terms of coverage and in-building penetration. Yes it's possible to install four times as many towers to compensate, but in practice this does not happen in most areas. Sprint's original slogan, "The Clear Alternative to Cellular" was also vague. Were they referring to analog AMPS or digital 800 Mhz TDMA, or digital 800 Mhz CDMA? OF course PCS is clearer than none of those so it doesn't really matter. Steve -------------------------------------------------- http://www.socalcell.com Southern California Area Cellular Carrier Comparison socalcellexpert@NO.MORE.SPAM.hotmail.com -------------------------------------------------- PCS isn't clearer than AMPS? What a statement. socallNOexpertSPAM@hotmail.com (Socal Cell) wrote in article <viall3gvceecab@corp.supernews.com>: > sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote in article > <20030728111354.06855.00000652@mb-m06.aol.com>: [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups] [....] > It's especially confusing because they try to make is > appear as if PCS is somehow an advantage, where it > actually is a tremendous disadvantage in terms of > coverage and in-building penetration. Yes it's possible > to install four times as many towers to compensate, > but in practice this does not happen in most areas. In the DFW area, Sprint partnered with the TXU power company, that's why a vast majority of their antennas are at the top of power towers, which are everywhere. It's no surprise they saved a load of capital by not having to build their own support structures, power inputs, and site acquisitions. At the intersection of LBJ and I-35E there are six Sprint antennas within sight of each other, none are co-locates. Maybe my next breakdown can be planned to occur on that bridge so I can count all the other antennas around there. [....] Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273 "All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of what we know." -- Richard Wilbur >In the DFW area, Sprint partnered with the TXU power company, that's >why a vast majority of their antennas are at the top of power towers, >which are everywhere. Actually, not they didn't!!!! PCS Primeco (now Verizon) had 10% of their stock purchased by TXU and THEY partnered with TXU. And their sites are the ones that are on the power companies towers. -- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net >>In the DFW area, Sprint partnered with the TXU power company, that's >>why a vast majority of their antennas are at the top of power towers, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > purchased by TXU and THEY partnered with TXU. And their sites are the ones that > are on the power companies towers. That's interesting... I'll pass this on to the four or five people that have led me astray. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273 "All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of what we know." -- Richard Wilbur > Note that Sprint PCS relies heavily on PCS affiliates in > some areas (a practice that is causing them grief > right now as several of their affiliates are in financial > trouble). T-Mobile would have as much of a claim to > say that they build an all-digital, all PCS network as > Sprint. But also note that Sprint PCS retains control over the PCS licenses utilized by its network partners. Such blurs the lines of actual control. The affiliate may have physically contructed the network, but Sprint PCS remains the licensee in the eyes of the FCC. W/o Sprint PCS' spectrum, the affiliates have nothing. The same is not true for affiliates of AT&TWS or VoiceStream dba T-Mobile. > Nextel also claims that they built an all digital network > but of course it is not PCS. While the trend has thankfully subsided, the erroneous use of the term PCS for marketing purposes ran rampant a few years ago, as if equating PCS w/ some moral good. AT&TWS was the most egregious offender, using the AT&TWS Digital PCS nomenclature to market its IS-136 TDMA network in all markets, regardless of whether that market was actually a Cellular license or PCS license. I am a firm believer in cutting through the marketing jargon and using terminology in a technically accurate manner. Cellular, w/ a capital C, is 800/850 MHz. PCS is 1900 MHz. No exceptions. Verizon Wireless, Cingular Wireless, AT&T Wireless all chose their names wisely (or serendipitously) to reflect combined Cellular & PCS spectrum holdings. US Cellular should change its name to US Wireless or US Mobile, etc, as even before the PrimeCo Chicago acquisition, USCC has had several PCS markets in which it does not also possess a coincident Cellular license. > Sprint's original slogan, "The Clear Alternative to Cellular" > was also vague. Were they referring to analog AMPS or > digital 800 Mhz TDMA, or digital 800 Mhz CDMA? OF course > PCS is clearer than none of those so it doesn't really > matter. "The Clear Alternative to Cellular" did actually have great relevance in 1996-1997 when Sprint PCS initially launched service. Many Cellular systems at the time still were solely AMPS 800. Even in markets where TDMA 800 or CDMA 800 overlay had taken place, many if not most subscribers were still using AMPS handsets, and many carriers still offered separate analog or digital plans. Credit the PCS start-ups like Sprint PCS or PCS PrimeCo or Aerial or VoiceStream, et al, for expediting and forcing the hand of the Cellular networks in their transition to digital air-interfaces. So, the Sprint PCS tagline most definitely had explicit meaning at the time. Unfortunately, the slogan has been ruefully driven into the ground during the years following. Andrew -- Andrew Shepherd cinema@ku.edu cinema@sprintpcs.com http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/main.html > I am a firm believer in cutting through the marketing jargon and using > terminology in a technically accurate manner. Cellular, w/ a capital > C, is 800/850 MHz. PCS is 1900 MHz. No exceptions. To the end user, having separate terminology is MORE confusing rather than less. Most people never got the hang of separate "VHF" and "UHF" knobs on TVs! To the average cellphone (um, PCS Phone?) user, the frequency and technology used are unimportant. Besides, are 1900MHz systems not comprised of cells, and therefore "cellular" in nature? Isn't any wireless carrier a seller of "personal communication services?" We already have nomenclature for 800 and 1900 MHz systems: 800MHz and 1900MHz! Think of it like ham radio- there are different bands, but it's all "ham radio." > Verizon > Wireless, Cingular Wireless, AT&T Wireless all chose their names > wisely (or serendipitously) to reflect combined Cellular & PCS > spectrum holdings. I disagree- it had nothing to do with reflecting anything about the type of service used. They all simply panicked when Sprint was threatening to turn "cellular" into a dirty word, so they distanced themselves from the word. "Wireless" was just as descriptive, and less dangerous. >"The Clear Alternative to Cellular" did actually have great relevance >in 1996-1997 when Sprint PCS initially launched service. Many [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >al, for expediting and forcing the hand of the Cellular networks in >their transition to digital air-interfaces. ... I respectfully disagree. It was actually a horse race between TDMA(IS-136)-AMPS and CDMA-AMPS. SignatureBest regards, John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.