 |
 | 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 / May 2007Ooops, Cingular did it again!
UPGRADE NOW! The letter says. Your new SIM CARD is Enclosed!! No thanks Cingular. I'll jack myself off...you don't have to do it:-). My friend and I were in a major Southern California city. He had upgraded to the new 64K SIMS. I am using the old style 32K SIMS. We were standing next to each other. I had 5 bars. He had 2 bars. We changed locations. Same results. Both phones are unlocked. We switched SIMS. Same result. The phone with the 32K SIMS had 5 bars. The phone with the 64K SIMS had 2 bars. We both have the same model phone: a Moto 557. No thanks Cingular... The only way to take my 32K SIMS from me: FROM MY COLD, BLUE DEAD finger. Enuf said. >UPGRADE NOW! The letter says. >Your new SIM CARD is Enclosed!! [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Enuf said. The two SIMs might well have been homed on two different networks, "blue" (old ATTWS) and "orange" (old Cingular), which could explain the difference, and easily solved by having the home network changed. My own experience is absolutely no difference in signal in switching from 32K to 64K, and from 64K to 3G, as expected. The home network difference issue will eventually go away when network integration is complete and Cingular has migrated all of its subscribers off the "orange" network now owned by T-Mobile.  SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> It is alleged that John Navas claimed: > The home network difference issue will eventually go away when network > integration is complete and Cingular has migrated all of its subscribers > off the "orange" network now owned by T-Mobile. Don't you mean off the "blue" network? Or does the move back to at&t mean that those who started on the "orange" network now have to move, too? SignatureJeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol Tips for evil cult members: 3. Avoid needless embarrassment. Practice the correct pronunciation of your deity's name in private before chanting it in public. Flash cards are helpful. Be very careful to pronounce only one syllable at a time; some deities pop up at every mention of their name, and expect to have an acceptable sacrifice waiting for them. >It is alleged that John Navas claimed: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >mean that those who started on the "orange" network now have to move, >too? I meant "orange" network, on which T-Mobile and Cingular had a joint venture, which interest Cingular sold to T-Mobile at the time of the merger with ATTWS, keeping the "blue" (old ATTWS) network for itself, buying back roaming from T-Mobile for a few years of transition. Long term Cingular wants subscribers on its own (blue) network rather than the now T-Mobile (orange) network. In many areas that's a plus, but there are undoubtedly areas where it's a minus. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >The home network difference issue will eventually go away when network >integration is complete and Cingular has migrated all of its subscribers >off the "orange" network now owned by T-Mobile. Didnt Navas years ago assure us that the integration of the ATTWS network was complete? >>The home network difference issue will eventually go away when network >>integration is complete and Cingular has migrated all of its subscribers >>off the "orange" network now owned by T-Mobile. > >Didnt Navas years ago assure us that the integration of the ATTWS >network was complete? No I didn't, but the integration is now largely complete, the remaining issue being the migration -- read more carefully instead of leaping into a silly childish attack. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > but the integration is now largely complete, You said that well over a year ago. >> but the integration is now largely complete, > >You said that well over a year ago. Google is wonderful.On January 26, 2005 Navas told us Integration would be complete by the end of 2006, cause thats what he was told. <http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=77321> Nothing childish about my having a good memory. What is childish is Navas uncorrectly accusing me of being childish cause we know he's contracticting himself. Now for his apology. >>> but the integration is now largely complete, >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Now for his apology. No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>>> but the integration is now largely complete, >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. You were wrong. Integration was not easy as you had predicted, its not complete, as you now admit. But October 24, 2004 you posted how easy it would be. Apology still due. >>No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >>My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. > >You were wrong. Integration was not easy as you had predicted, its not >complete, as you now admit. But October 24, 2004 you posted how easy >it would be. Not true on all counts. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>>No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >>>My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Not true on all counts. Absolutely true as Google posts prove. You're the childish one for omitting the links that prove you wrong. Google is wonderful.On January 26, 2005 Navas told us Integration would be complete by the end of 2006, cause thats what he was told. <http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=77321> and You were wrong. Integration was not easy as you had predicted, its not complete, as you now admit. But October 24, 2004 you posted how easy it would be. Apology still due. Still waiting on your apology. Google does not lie. >>>>No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >>>>My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Absolutely true as Google posts prove. You're the childish one for >omitting the links that prove you wrong. You're the one making claims and omitting links. >Google is wonderful.On January 26, 2005 Navas told us Integration >would be complete by the end of 2006, ... Proof? >You were wrong. > >Integration was not easy as you had predicted, its not >complete, as you now admit. I was actually correct. >But October 24, 2004 you posted how easy >it would be. Proof? >Apology still due. Nope. >Google does not lie. You've not presented anything from Google -- you're just making claims. I'm done unless and until you've actually got some real evidence. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>>>>No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >>>>>My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > I'm done unless and until you've actually got some real evidence. Actually you have been "Done" here for a long time. You are nothing but a "Shill" for Ching-Chingular and everyone knows it. The ONLY reason you would be on here (Usenet) hurling it out would be for pay from them.You post *NOTHING* but propaganda for Chingular.Your advise is nothing more tham SPAM for them. People COULD just killfile you, but in all fairness it's best that they Squash/Bash and otherwise expose the worthless biased GARBAGE you spew out on a daily basis here.... In *MY* opinion (and others) John Navas and the imaginatory "John Navas Group" are a team of horse's a.ses, paid by Chingular to spread "Pro-Chingular" crapola all over the internet. By the way...stick your PGP "Fingerprint" up your a.s.... >Path: newsdbm02.news.prodigy.net!newsdst02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!c0e53274!not-for-mail >From: John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > >You've not presented anything from Google -- you're just making claims. I most certainly have, and proved you wrong. Will you aqpolgize with the exact google listings for your postings to alt.cellular.cingular on the dates listed, which prove you predicted no problems and a full integration of ATTWS networks by end 2006 ??? Of course not the man-child is never wrong. WAAAAAH. > Apology still due. > > Still waiting on your apology. > > Google does not lie. Dear god, grow up. So he made a forward looking statement that wasn't 100% correct. Big fuggin deal. A "my bad, close but no cigar" maybe, but an apology? What did his being wrong hurwt your widdle feewings or something? John, I'm not sure why you're such a lightning rod of the unhelpful. Your signal to noise ratio is pretty high so far as I can tell. Best Regards, -- Todd H. http://toddh.net/ >> Apology still due. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >John, I'm not sure why you're such a lightning rod of the unhelpful. >Your signal to noise ratio is pretty high so far as I can tell. Thanks. The basic problem is a few people who troll here for the purpose of bashing GSM in general and AT&T/Cingular in particular. My correcting of the record infuriates them, so they go after me as one of the "enemy". Jealousy also seems to play a part. Sadly that flaming interferes with legitimate use of this newsgroup, but because of the way Usenet works, is something we just have to put up with. Like sunspot activity the flaming tends to wax and wane. At the moment it's relatively near a maximum. It will hopefully die down again soon, and we can then spend more time on more productive activities. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>>No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >>>My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Not true on all counts. Call it "Childish" if you like John.....but you are a world class HORSE'S a.s........ I really dislike people like *you*, that are "Right" even when proven WRONG.... >Call it "Childish" if you like John.....but you are a world class HORSE'S >a.s........ >I really dislike people like *you*, that are "Right" even when proven >WRONG.... You've just described yourself. Grow up. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>>No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. >>>My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Not true on all counts. Google is your friend and never lies. > Apology still due. I guess it all depends on your definition of "largely." It's been 2.5 years since the merger. Less than a year after the merger a large percentage of the AT&T user base, both TDMA and GSM, had migrated to Cingular GSM, or left. Of course at that time, Navas was blaming the poor results of the Consumer Reports survey on the small percentage of TDMA users that were still on Cingular or AT&T (which made no sense since the TDMA/AMPS coverage was better than the GSM coverage). It was only after there were almost no TDMA customers left that he changed his story about why Cingular continued to do so poorly, inventing some bizarres stories about the survey methodology. It must suck to have to spend every waking moment coming up with that kind of crap! Anyway, don't hold your breath waiting for an apology. >> Apology still due. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Cingular continued to do so poorly, inventing some bizarres stories >about the survey methodology. As usual, you just make wild charges with nothing to back them up. In fact I did nothing of the sort -- my position has been consistent all along. >It must suck to have to spend every waking >moment coming up with that kind of crap! It must suck to have so much free time and anger that you have to spend it here on flaming. >Anyway, don't hold your breath waiting for an apology. We do agree on something. "Wonders will never cease." :) SignatureBest regards, John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com> 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence, whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.' Being a BLUE customer for over 4 years and having switched to being a ORANGE customer in December 2006... After 4 months I can confidently say two things about the cingular 64K SIM network... 1] I have lower signal in more places where I would had always had good reception... Namely customers I've had for years... regular driving routes and my own home and office. 2] Data speeds are overall about 1/5th of the speed using a Cingular Orange SIM rather than my old blue SIM... Both of these observations have been made using the same phone on the same firmware... the only change is the SIM. >Being a BLUE customer for over 4 years and having switched to being a >ORANGE customer in December 2006... After 4 months I can confidently >say two things about the cingular 64K SIM network... There is no "64K SIM network". There is a "blue" network and an "orange" network. Any SIM (64K or otherwise) can be programmed to Home on either network, but in California would normally only be programmed to the "blue" network, since the "orange" network is now owned by T-Mobile, and AT&T/Cingular needs to migrate its customers to the "blue" network in order to avoid future roaming costs. >1] I have lower signal in more places where I would had always had >good reception... Namely customers I've had for years... regular [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Both of these observations have been made using the same phone on the >same firmware... the only change is the SIM. The likely change is the Home network. Your SIMs were just programmed differently. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>Being a BLUE customer for over 4 years and having switched to being a >>ORANGE customer in December 2006... After 4 months I can confidently [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > T-Mobile, and AT&T/Cingular needs to migrate its customers to the "blue" > network in order to avoid future roaming costs. Recent SIMs in California seem to home to 310-410 (SIM serial number starts with 8901410) just like everywhere else in the country. I've not seen a 64k SIM which homed to another network. You apparently need an ENS phone for it to consider AT&T 310-380 a "home" network; my non-ENS overseas phones turn on the roaming indicator when using a California Cingular SIM in California. You certainly seem to be right about Cingular wanting people to get new SIMs to eliminate roaming costs. The T-Mobile 310-170 network refuses service to a 310-410 SIM where I live, so switching everyone to the latter SIM eliminates a lot of roaming. If I had a Cingular 310-170 SIM I think I'd keep it out of spite. Dennis Ferguson > Being a BLUE customer for over 4 years and having switched to being a > ORANGE customer in December 2006... After 4 months I can confidently [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 2] Data speeds are overall about 1/5th of the speed using a Cingular > Orange SIM rather than my old blue SIM... Is your phone old enough that it doesn't support ENS? All new Cingular SIMs seem to home to 310-410 now, but ENS is supposed to fix it so that the phone will attach to 310-380 if that signal is better. With non-ENS phones (I have one, bought overseas) I have to force it manually to 310-380 if 310-410 is available at all. > Both of these observations have been made using the same phone on the > same firmware... the only change is the SIM. If your phone is old changing the home network of the SIM can cause this. If your phone is new enough to support ENS, however, this isn't supposed to happen (in theory). Dennis Ferguson >> Being a BLUE customer for over 4 years and having switched to being a >> ORANGE customer in December 2006... After 4 months I can confidently [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >this. If your phone is new enough to support ENS, however, this isn't >supposed to happen (in theory). ENS actually just makes it possible for AT&T/Cingular to manually "home" the phone OTA (over the air) to different networks. It does _not_ make it possible for the phone to pick the better network signal -- an ENS phone will still prefer the home network signal even when a non-home network signal is much better (as per standard GSM operation). SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>> Being a BLUE customer for over 4 years and having switched to being a >>> ORANGE customer in December 2006... After 4 months I can confidently [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >phone will still prefer the home network signal even when a non-home >network signal is much better (as per standard GSM operation). which is EXACTLY why I ain't gonna upgrade. f.ck Cingular and their ENS. Also f.ck anybody who promotes ENS. >>ENS actually just makes it possible for AT&T/Cingular to manually "home" >>the phone OTA (over the air) to different networks. It does _not_ make [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >f.ck Cingular and their ENS. Also f.ck anybody who promotes ENS. You're probably only putting off the inevitable, and probably not for long -- AT&T/Cingular wants (needs) to migrate all subscribers to its own network, and will probably cut off those that haven't migrated sometime soon, just as with IS-136(TDMA). SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:34:10 -0500, Dennis Ferguson >>If your phone is old changing the home network of the SIM can cause [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > phone will still prefer the home network signal even when a non-home > network signal is much better (as per standard GSM operation). Ah, I didn't know that, though it makes sense. I think I'll be keeping my non-ENS phone with manual network selection (also as per standard GSM operation), however, as I think I'm better off retaining my choice of networks rather than letting Cingular choose for me. Dennis Ferguson On Apr 11, 9:45 am, karlkrand...@sbcglobal.net wrote: > On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:34:26 GMT, John Navas > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Your right buddy. The integration is far from complete and has been no easy task! It will be a long time before the blue is converted to orange and with the sunset of TDMA, will only add the the confusion. 3GFreak www.mobilevertigo.com >>>> but the integration is now largely complete, >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > No apology needed from me -- things happened pretty much as I forecast. > My prognostication record is way ahead of several others posting here. IN your dreams maybe. You getting lucky every once in a while is not something to hang your hat on, Novice. > On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:28:28 -0700, no_b...@home.com wrote in > <mndo139t3kidrk2ragc6g2p2adbk66k...@4ax.com>: [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > - Show quoted text - 64K and 3G are one in the same. Happy celling 3GFreak >> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:28:28 -0700, no_b...@home.com wrote in >> <mndo139t3kidrk2ragc6g2p2adbk66k...@4ax.com>: [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >Happy celling >3GFreak As near as I can tell the only difference between a 64K Sim and a 3G Sim is that the 3G sim says 3G on it. I put my existing 64K sim in an 8525, and 3G worked just fine thank you. >> The two SIMs might well have been homed on two different networks, >> "blue" (old ATTWS) and "orange" (old Cingular), which could explain the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> integration is complete and Cingular has migrated all of its subscribers >> off the "orange" network now owned by T-Mobile. >64K and 3G are one in the same. They are actually different, easily identified by different markings on the SIM. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > UPGRADE NOW! The letter says. > Your new SIM CARD is Enclosed!! [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Enuf said. Lucky you. I haven't received any new SIM card notification, but maybe because I have a Treo (which it may not apply to) and all the goodies work fine. First rule, if it works, don't fix it. SignatureTo reply by email, remove the word "space" I got significantly better coverage when I upgraded. Signature"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." --President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties. >UPGRADE NOW! The letter says. >Your new SIM CARD is Enclosed!! [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Enuf said. Oh boy. I am the one who started this thread. Interesting how it matured??? if that is the correct word... into the current discussion. Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" >Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" More like "Oooops, stirred up the childish trolls again" SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" > > More like "Oooops, stirred up the childish trolls again" Actually John, your credibility was sh.t before, you just make is easy for first time readers to see what an a.s you really are. Remove ALL doubt......make sure they know what a paid off Jerk you are for Cingular... dOn Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:15:49 GMT, "amanda" <amanda772009@yahoo.com> wrote in <VlbTh.14167$JZ3.13188@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>: >>>Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Remove ALL doubt......make sure they know what a paid off Jerk you are for >Cingular... Now I understand why the rest of your family can't deal with you. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> >>Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" > >More like "Oooops, stirred up the childish trolls again" childish trools: Did nothing of the sort. My original post was to demonstrate why it would not pay me to change from the 32K SIM to the 64K SIM. My post was not intended to trool. YOU on the other hand jumped in with both hands & feet finally ending up sticking your foot in your mouth. IMHO you got EXACTLY what you deserve. Like one of the responders said:: your credibility is sh.t. You sound like a Cingular lap dog. >>>Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >demonstrate why it would not pay me to change from the 32K SIM to the 64K >SIM. My post was not intended to trool. It was nonetheless wrong. >YOU on the other hand jumped in with both hands & feet finally ending up >sticking your foot in your mouth. IMHO you got EXACTLY what you deserve. >Like one of the responders said:: your credibility is sh.t. My credibility isn't affected by nasty misstatements like that, which only serve to diminish your own credibility. >You sound like a Cingular lap dog. You sound like a 12 year old. SignatureBest regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS: John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ> > >childish trools: Did nothing of the sort. My original post was to > >demonstrate why it would not pay me to change from the 32K SIM to the 64K > >SIM. My post was not intended to trool. > > It was nonetheless wrong. Rubbish. > >YOU on the other hand jumped in with both hands & feet finally ending up > >sticking your foot in your mouth. IMHO you got EXACTLY what you deserve. > >Like one of the responders said:: your credibility is sh.t. > > My credibility isn't affected by nasty misstatements like that Nonsense. >>YOU on the other hand jumped in with both hands & feet finally ending up >>sticking your foot in your mouth. IMHO you got EXACTLY what you deserve. >>Like one of the responders said:: your credibility is sh.t. > > My credibility isn't affected by nasty misstatements like that, which > only serve to diminish your own credibility. Nothing can be affected that you do not possess, Skippy. >>You sound like a Cingular lap dog. > > You sound like a 12 year old. Which would put him a year ahead of you in school. > >>>Seems like "Oooops, Navas stepped in it again" > >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > You sound like a 12 year old. LOL - get a room you guys... SignatureTo reply by email, remove the word "space" > > You sound like a 12 year old. > > LOL - get a room you guys... Navas would love to get a room with a 12 year old boy, no doubt... |
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
|
©2009 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.