 |
 | 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 / General / GSM / October 2004T-Mobile in LA?
Can anyone comment on how good T-Mobile's signal is in the LA area? West Hollywood...Westwood? I'm mainly talking about blackberry coverage, which doesn't need as strong a signal as phone coverage, but would appreciate comments on phone coverage as well. How about Nextel? Which is best in that area? Thanks! terrible coverage on sunset bl from 405 thru bh. i read somewhere that were new cell sites on ucla campus but don't remember which companies. apparently tmobile does have sites south of ucla > Can anyone comment on how good T-Mobile's signal is in the LA area? West > Hollywood...Westwood? I'm mainly talking about blackberry coverage, which [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Thanks! > Can anyone comment on how good T-Mobile's signal is in the LA area? West > Hollywood...Westwood? I'm mainly talking about blackberry coverage, which > doesn't need as strong a signal as phone coverage, but would appreciate > comments on phone coverage as well. Don't they share towers in LA with Cingular? 1900 GSM? I usually get Cingular all over LA County & Orange County, if not my phone roams on to AT & T, but cannot get T-Mobile (at least the operator logo) anywhere in these counties. (I am roaming on a Tel$tra Australia GSM sim, hope this helps.)  SignatureI idiot-proof my programs, but along comes a bigger idiot. >Don't they share towers in LA with Cingular? 1900 GSM? I heard that they were sharing or going to be sharing cell sites with either Cingular or AT&T. I guess it doesn't make muc difference now that they've become the same company. One person told me that his T-Mobile coverage was better in the San Fernando Valley and West Los Angeles than it had been with AT&T. But he had been on AT&T's analog network and everyone else I know complains about T-Mobile's coverage. My AT&T GSM service works very well throughout Los Angeles, including Brentwood, Beverly Hills and Westwood near UCLA's campus. There are a few minor no-service areas that I hope will dissappear as the Cingular finishes merging the networks, my father's Cingular service is near flawless. Steve Grauman >I guess it doesn't make muc difference now that they've >become the same company. Really! And when did this happen? The FCC hasn't even given final approval and you're saying that they're the same company?!!!!!! I'm at a loss as to why people think when a company changes all they have to do is flick a light switch and it's fait accompli. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >Really! And when did this happen? The FCC hasn't even given final >approval and you're saying that they're the same company?!!!!!! Jesus, let's have an argument over minor details, huh? I don't think there's any doubt that the FCC will greenlight everything, and Cingular has been very clear about the fact that things are moving along and that the two companies will be "as one" by mid next year if they can stay on schedule. My AT&T phone is already behaving differently because of the merger, it's obvious that network changes have been made and ARE affecting service - FCC approval or not. Steve Grauman >>Really! And when did this happen? The FCC hasn't even given final >>approval and you're saying that they're the same company?!!!!!! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >network changes have been made and ARE affecting service - FCC approval or not. >Steve Grauman You yourself have said it that it will be *several* months before both companies are combined. People keep acting as if it's already happened and will be done in a couple of weeks. I'm not sure why people think it's a really simple task to combine two major companies. It's not and depending on how things go it could be really smooth or could be very bumpy. I've been a part of a major company that merged with another and the joining of the two companies was fraught with problems that lasted for literally months. It will be nice if things go without a hitch uniting both companies but experience and history tells me it will be a different story. And I'm not quite sure why you believe it is a "minor" detail merging the number two and number three wireless carrier with thousands and thousands of subscribers. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >You yourself have said it that it will be *several* months before both >companies are combined. >You yourself have said it that it will be *several* months before both >companies are combined. Completely combined, yes. But I'm telling you that my AT&T service is definitely different as the result of the merger. I'm now getting altered service (usually for the better) and it's been happening since shortly after the merger was announced (around last April if memory serves me). I'm not sure why you are having a hard time accepting this. >People keep acting as if it's already >happened and will be done in a couple of weeks. I'm not acting that way. But as I've now stated twice, my service is different, and it's getting better on a near daily basis because of the merger. This is DESPITE the fact that the FCC hasn't given the full greenlight. My only point was that changes ARE being made, the quality of service at the moment is NOT consistant and that these need to be taken into consideration. We've been seriously considering moving our 4 AT&T numbers into a shared family-talk plan. But since we don't know what will be happening, we've decided to wait it out till' the merger is done before switching things around. >And I'm not quite sure why you >believe it is a "minor" detail merging the number two and number three >wireless carrier with thousands and thousands of subscribers. I consider it a minor detail because the merger is obviously still moving along at decent pace, and neither Cingular or the remnants of AT&T seem to be hitting any major snags. And the Cingular people seem VERY confident that the FCC will come through and that the merger will be complete by mid next year. Steve Grauman >> Can anyone comment on how good T-Mobile's signal is in the LA area? West >> Hollywood...Westwood? I'm mainly talking about blackberry coverage, which [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >roams on to AT & T, but cannot get T-Mobile (at least the operator logo) >anywhere in these counties. That will change and the infrastructure will become TM's in that area once the AT&T Wireless/Cingular buyout is completed. >(I am roaming on a Tel$tra Australia GSM sim, hope this helps.) Not sure where Hollywood and Westwood are, but in LA T-Mobile has pretty good coverage in New Orleans, Baton Rouge and along I-10 and I-12. Get very far off the Interstates and you don't get much coverage. SignatureDonald Newcomb DRNewcomb (at) attglobal (dot) net P.S. Was that LA or L.A. you were interested in? ;-) > Can anyone comment on how good T-Mobile's signal is in the LA area? West > Hollywood...Westwood? I'm mainly talking about blackberry coverage, which [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Thanks! >Not sure where Hollywood and Westwood are, but in LA T-Mobile has pretty >good coverage in New Orleans, Baton Rouge and along I-10 and I-12. The original poster is talking about Los Angeles, California. ;-) Steve Grauman > The original poster is talking about Los Angeles, California. ;-) Ah. L. A. CA, not LA ;-) Point being, that most people on the West Coast tend to forget that there is a place on the South Coast with the official USPS abreviation "LA" SignatureDonald Newcomb DRNewcomb (at) attglobal (dot) net >Not sure where Hollywood and Westwood are, but in LA T-Mobile has pretty >good coverage in New Orleans, Baton Rouge and along I-10 and I-12. Get very >far off the Interstates and you don't get much coverage. Err, Donald I believe the LA that's being referred to is Los Angeles rather than Louisiana :) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >How about Nextel? Which is best in that >area? If you want cellular phone service, you do not want NEXTEL. They are an SMR and don't offer cellular service. They are a 2-way walkie talkie company. -- John S. e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net > Can anyone comment on how good T-Mobile's signal is in the LA area? West > Hollywood...Westwood? I'm mainly talking about blackberry coverage, which > doesn't need as strong a signal as phone coverage, but would appreciate > comments on phone coverage as well. How about Nextel? Which is best in that > area? Coverage is pretty good all over Los Angeles / SoCal area for T-Mobile. I've never had problems in the areas you mention. Don't know about Nextel. |
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.